QMS Performance Trends - Based on fixed or flexible periods - Clause 5.6.1.1

C

ctblalock

#1
5.6.1.1 states that mgt reviews "...shall include all requirements of the QMS and it's performance trends..."

To minimize the possibilty of process leaders adjusting the time period that their trends are based upon (in order to appear more favorable), our mgt review team has defined a trend as the current month plus the last three months. This definition is not rigidly applied because some indicators may need to reflect a longer time period in order to be effective. Those exceptions aside, generally we consider a trend during the last 3 to 4 months to be more indicative of our current perfomance and also allows us to react sooner to unfavorable situations. This works for us and we are flexible in it's application.

Altough our trends are typically based on this defined period, we maintain all historical data to facilitate more in depth analysis as needed and to comply with the requirement below.

The "Rules for achieving IATF recognition" (2nd Edition dated 31May04) states in Annex 1, "Stage 1 audit- Readiness review", first bullet point under the "What" column- "The organization shall provide the following documentation to the audit team for review, and for use in planning the audit.....including key indicators and peformance trends for the previous 12 months, minimum."

We interpret this to mean that we must have at least twelve months of data for our indicators and that this must be supplied to the CB for his/her preparation and review. Our auditor interprets this rule to mean that the trends that are presented and reviewed during Mgt Review must reflect a period of twelve months.

What say YOU?????



p.s. many may respond that the actual data takes precendence over the trend. We agree and always consider both in order to conduct a proper analysis. Nevertheless, one of our key system indicators is "% of indicators with a favorable trend". As such, specifying or standardizing the trend period is important to us. I have attached a graph for reference.
 

Attachments

Elsmar Forum Sponsor
#2
Re: Performance trends- based on fixed or flexible periods

My understanding is that you must provide (for the stage 1) trends based on 12 month's worth of data. If I understand correctly, ct, your auditor is requiring you to review the whole 12 months (at a time) for trends, is that so?

I could see a case where it is important to see a trend over the year, but if you are monitoring (let's say quarterly) the trend against the goal, that's fine too. The example shows a nice trend.

My take on it, FWIW, is that the IATF/AIAG training for external auditors is pushing them to look at poor performance spikes on a data graph so they can 'add value' by interogating the QMS at that time/point to see what you did about it.........:rolleyes:

So if you present them only 1 quarter's data at a time, then they can't see the 'big picture'.......:notme:
 

Steve Prevette

Deming Disciple
Leader
Super Moderator
#3
Re: Performance trends- based on fixed or flexible periods

The "Rules for achieving IATF recognition" (2nd Edition dated 31May04) states in Annex 1, "Stage 1 audit- Readiness review", first bullet point under the "What" column- "The organization shall provide the following documentation to the audit team for review, and for use in planning the audit.....including key indicators and peformance trends for the previous 12 months, minimum."

We interpret this to mean that we must have at least twelve months of data for our indicators and that this must be supplied to the CB for his/her preparation and review. Our auditor interprets this rule to mean that the trends that are presented and reviewed during Mgt Review must reflect a period of twelve months.

What say YOU?????
In my current job at Fluor, dealing with trends, if I received this request, I would interpret it as - "What trends have you detected in the past 12 months?". This would then need more history that just 12 months, for example, if I hit the 7th month in a row below average in August 2006, that would count as a trend I detected 12 months ago. I would need to show at least 19 months of data, plus I'd want to show some of the previous baseline. Besides, by procedure here, we keep at least 25 data points on our charts.

A couple of notes to put this response in context: We aren't under IATF here, so my interpretation may be "incorrect". We do routinely use SPC here and a strict set of trend rules to define "what is a trend". We have a lot of history here, and many charts have upwards of 120 months of data available to support them.
 
C

ctblalock

#4
Re: Performance trends- based on fixed or flexible periods

...If I understand correctly, ct, your auditor is requiring you to review the whole 12 months (at a time) for trends, is that so?
Yes to your question and I would agree with his point IF we did not have data older than what we have defined as a trend but WE DO maintain the historical data AND we use it whenever we are analyzing a particular process. However, during mgt review, when we are presenting/reviewing a summary of 100+ indicators, having a consistent trend period helps us to properly focus our attention.


...So if you present them only 1 quarter's data at a time, then they can't see the 'big picture'
We presented them the 12 mths+ information.
I just think that the bullet point mentioned in annex 1 of IATF's rules is specifying what we must provide to the CB and that 5.6.1 & 5.6.1.1 of the standard itself requires "planned intervals" and review of "performance trends" without specifying what constitutes a trend.
 

Helmut Jilling

Auditor / Consultant
#5
Re: Performance trends- based on fixed or flexible periods

My understanding is that you must provide (for the stage 1) trends based on 12 month's worth of data. If I understand correctly, ct, your auditor is requiring you to review the whole 12 months (at a time) for trends, is that so?

I could see a case where it is important to see a trend over the year, but if you are monitoring (let's say quarterly) the trend against the goal, that's fine too. The example shows a nice trend.

My take on it, FWIW, is that the IATF/AIAG training for external auditors is pushing them to look at poor performance spikes on a data graph so they can 'add value' by interogating the QMS at that time/point to see what you did about it.........:rolleyes:

So if you present them only 1 quarter's data at a time, then they can't see the 'big picture'.......:notme:

gosh, we find the most interesting things to debate...

I pretty much agree with Andy. The TS requirement is to HAVE 12 months worth of data. Any less, and the system is deemed to be too young to demonstrate it is effective. However, TS does not say you have to review all 12 months all the time, although it is common. Year-to-Date is also very common.

The comment that "we have 100+ metrics we review and it makes sense to have them all reflect the same time period" makes perfect sense. There is nothing in TS that says you have to do it differently. In fact, if you track 100+ metrics, I don't see any other option as workable.

Also, I may question why the management team is actively tracking 100+ metrics. Many companies have that many metrics, but the management team does not have to review everyone of them. Many may only be relevant at the department level. But, again, your choice, not the auditors.

We auditors may have opinions, but we have to give clients a lot of room to run their businesses in their own way.

Auditors, please stop imposing your opinions on your clients! To share is one thing. To make them requirements is flat out wrong! Stop it!:cool:
 
C

ctblalock

#7
Re: Performance trends- based on fixed or flexible periods

... In fact, if you track 100+ metrics, I don't see any other option as workable.

Also, I may question why the management team is actively tracking 100+ metrics. Many companies have that many metrics, but the management team does not have to review everyone of them. Many may only be relevant at the department level. But, again, your choice, not the auditors...

hjilling- thanks for the response/insight. Regarding 100+ metrics, mgt review is presented a summary of these metrics (see attached). For this reason a defined trend period is important to us. Then we have the ability to dive into any part of the summary that may be of concern. Such a dive would include a review of 12 mths+ data for that indicator. Just as our review of the organization level metrics also considers 12 mths+ results. Again, thanks for the additional reference point.

ctb
 

Attachments

Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
K What are metrics on performance trends for review of the QMS? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
D QMS Performance Based on how many NCRs were generated month to month Nonconformance and Corrective Action 8
Z Key Performance Indicators (KPI) for QMS Department Advice and Opinions IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
C Measuring Performance of QMS - QA material for Physics ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
S Do Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) really make a difference in the QMS? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
D KPI's (Key Performance Indicators) of the Recruitment Service Industry QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
K What inputs and outputs are related to QMS Performance? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
J Performance Indicators for Quality Management Systems (QMS) in Engineering Companies ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 42
S Disparity between Job Descriptions in QMS & Contract ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
qualprod Minimize tomention other positions to ease the QMS management ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
S QMS certificate and Samlping EU Medical Device Regulations 0
H Mapping QMS+business processes in a medical device with class I and IIa+b Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 3
Y Must Initial importers have any QMS? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
qualprod QMS global effectiveness? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
Q 13485 QMS turnkey ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
K New to Medical Device QMS and would like advice ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
N QMS standard for a research based Organisation Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 1
Moncia Integrated QMS and audit Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 5
J New QMS Auditor - seeking opportunities to gain audit experience Career and Occupation Discussions 3
Sam Lazzara Record signature requirements in proposed FDA 21 CFR 820 QMS Regulation 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 9
qualprod External consultant into a QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 15
S Changing PCB Assembler and impact on QMS and MDD CE Certificate EU Medical Device Regulations 2
ChrisM Class 1 non-sterile device, need certified QMS or not? EU Medical Device Regulations 2
A CDRH Learn and DICE for Building a QMS 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 6
A QMS inside a Non medical device firm ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
S HELP in setting-up QMS Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 4
S How long the QMS must be maintained after device EOL? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
K Processes interaction of QMS Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 4
P Can I exempt products/services from my AS9100 QMS? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
J0anne QMS Implementation Iran ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
adir88 Substantial Change to QMS (Annex IX, Chapter I) EU Medical Device Regulations 0
Watchcat When to begin putting together postmarket production QMS for a mobile app? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 13
B QMS Functional Safety Checklist ISO 26262 - Road vehicles – Functional safety 0
D Proof QMS compliance for class I ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
A Need career advice on QMS & HSE (No hands on experience) Career and Occupation Discussions 6
M Sharing QMS Documents with Customers Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 13
M Options when MSA acc. to VDA 5 is NOK (Qms > 30%) Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 0
D QMS Realignment after business splits into 2 different companies AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
G One-person QMS - possible? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 18
A SaaS SaMD - Impact QMS ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S ISO9001 QMS: Quality Manual Examples & Templates ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
K Is implementing Electronic Signatures a Significant Change to the QMS? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
qualprod Can a consultant be audited instead of QMS responsible? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
S Do you follow your QMS for non-device software features? Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics 4
Ed Panek How to address a QMS Entry Error ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
D Digital Healthcare - QMS requirements Other US Medical Device Regulations 3
BeaBea QMS/ Training Management Software Service Industry Specific Topics 4
R QMS for Medical products & Pharmaceutical Drugs in one facility Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 3
C First Round of QMS Internal Audits - Ethical Dilemma Internal Auditing 10
N Handling B-Grade Products within the QMS ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 15

Similar threads

Top Bottom